(Correspondence) Abortion perils debated

Linda Capperauld

Canadian Medical Association Journal, CMAJ
Canadian Medical Association Journal

Extract
Not only is the article by David Reardon and associates1 flawed . . . but the authors, particularly the lead author, have a specific and known political bias against abortion rights. . . By publishing an article that does not adhere to high standards, we feel that CMAJ has done a disservice to our field, not to mention women and their families across the nation.


Capperauld L. (Correspondence) Abortion perils debated. Can Med Assoc J. 2003 Jul 22;169(2):101.

(Correspondence) Abortion perils debated

Denise Sevier-Fries

Canadian Medical Association Journal, CMAJ
Canadian Medical Association Journal

Extract
In publishing the abortion opinions(not facts) of David Reardon and associates,1 you have damaged the credibility and reputation of your journal.


Sevier-Fries D. (Correspondence) Abortion perils debated. Can Med Assoc J. 2003 Jul 22;169(2):101.